he court did not act in the public interest, as with us, but waited until the plaintiff requested service. Moreover, until the case had been decided, the accuser and the accused received the same treatment. Both were imprisoned; and the plaintiff who lost his case suffered the same penalty which the defendant, had he been found guilty, would have undergone.

A form of trial which especially appealed to the warlike nobles was the judicial duel - a trial by combat. The accuser and the accused fought with each other; and the conqueror won the case. God, it was believed, would give victory to the innocent party, because he had right on his side.

The law followed in a feudal court was largely based on old Germanic customs. The court did not act in the public interest, as with us, but waited until the plaintiff requested service. Moreover, until the case had been decided, the accuser and the accused received the same treatment. Both were imprisoned; and the plaintiff who lost his case suffered the same penalty which the defendant, had he been found guilty, would have undergone.

Ordeals, however, formed a method of appealing to God, the results of which could be immediately observed. A common form of ordeal was by fire. The accused walked barefoot over live brands, or stuck his hand into a flame, or carried a piece of red-hot iron for a certain distance. In the ordeal by hot water he plunged his arm into boiling water. A man established his innocence through one of these tests, if the wound healed properly after three days. The ordeal by cold water rested on the belief that pure water would reject the criminal. Hence the accused was thrown bound into a stream: if he floated he was guilty; if he sank he was innocent and had to be rescued. Though a crude method of securing justice, ordeals were doubtless useful in many instances. The real culprit would often prefer to confess, rather than incur the anger of God by submitting to the test and ordeals.